Calendar

Obama Birth Certificate Shows He Was Never Born!

Reliable news sources such as KXMB TV in Bismarck, North Dakota continue to report on the conspiracy theory that Barack Obama was not born in the United States, although his mother and father were both in the United States at the time that he was born. They point out that the state of Hawaii, where Obama purports to have been born, has not released his official birth certificate, suspiciously following the same policy that they do for every other person born in Hawaii. More darkly, they note that everyone who might have had firsthand knowledge of Barack Obama’s birth has died – including his great-great-great-great grandparents (all 64 of them – how ruthless).

We here at Irregular Times are now able, however, to bring you this exclusive story: Anonymous sources tell us that Barack Obama was in fact never born! That explains the whole birth certificate thing.

You know how Obama appeared to come out of nowhere in 2004? Well, he did. Genetic engineering, you know. Barack Obama is only going to have his 5th birthday this next July. That means that he’s not eligible to serve as President, or to drink beer. You know what they say – if you don’t want to sit down and have a beer with a guy, he definitely isn’t qualified to be President.

Share this:

About the authorJim Cook

I haven’t been everywhere, but I’ve lived lots of places in the USA: the North, the South, the East, the West, and places in between. Every place I’ve been, I’ve seen acts large and small of kindness, callousness and disregard. Here we are. What will we do?

29 thoughts on“Obama Birth Certificate Shows He Was Never Born!”

Well, that explains a lot of the squirrely thinking that goes on here, you believe anonymous Sources.
The policy Hawaii follows for every other person, is fine for every OTHER PERSON, but Obama is President Elect of The United States. Any attempt to be other than fully transparent, only fans the fires of NUTS on both sides of the issue.

Tongue in cheek? Oh I thought you were serious, when no that makes my comment look silly…. Hate to tell you but there are different laws for “the President” and the common man…….Try threatening the Prez. I also believe that their taxes are open to the public either willingly or otherwise….Being a public figure is in another dimension.

I have a Very dry sence of humor.. sometimes you might have to see me to know I’m kidding.

Since no congressman and senator objected on 1/8/09 to Congress’ count and certification of the electoral vote which would have turned resolution of Obama’s eligibility issue over to Congress, rendering moot both the Berg and Lightfoot cases, Berg finally does achieve standing on the issue of actual harm, to be addressed at the 1/9/09 SCOTUS Conference on Writ of Certiorari. Obama’s failure to submit evidence of his constitutional qualification for the 1/9/09 conference will mean he cannot thereafter challenge Berg’s request to enjoin the 1/8/09 Congressional electoral count and certification, albeit retroactive, scheduled for SCOTUS conference 1/16/09. Moreover, Chief Justice Roberts has scheduled a full Court conference on the Lightfoot case 1/23/09 in the event there needs to be a Constitutionally mandated action, the Inauguration itself, to enjoin retroactively.

Good luck with that. Berg was already turned down by three SCOTUS justices. The prior Fed Judge that turned down the case wrote a 34 page judgement refuting the plantiff to eliminate any appeal based on missed step. Berg will get turned down with the 100+ other cases that will be reviewed that day. Lightfoot got turned down by Jus. Kennedy and then got put in the pile of cases to reject later by Jus. Roberts. Dorofrio followed the exact same path in December and got canned without comment. Berg will be next and has zero chance, and now Lightfoot will follow. Anybody can file at the SCOTUS and get into that Cert conference by pestering a second or thirs judge. They just flip that case onto a list. Why is it that NO constitutional scholars have given these jokers the time of day? Not even one rightwing congressman took the bait!

To all of you Obama apologists, I can understand why you would choose to ignore this issue. The facts are: Obama refuses to release his birth certificate (along with many other things), and the certificate of live birth that was released (which doesn’t prove birthplace) has been definitively shown to be a forgery. The ‘natural born’ clause in the Constitution was not placed into it lightly, by non-serious vacuous thinkers. We are bound by its laws. That’s all there is to it. When its finally shown that Obama was born in Kenya and allowed to continue serving as POTUS, then in the future any foreign billionaire can run for POTUS. Besides, Obama’s lies about this betray a shockingly poor character of someone who will say or do anything to promote themselves. Its best that he be declared ineligible and escorted back to Chicago and fade away.

If you were to take a look at what we’ve written about Barack Obama over the last year, you’d see that we’re hardly Obama apologists. We criticize Obama strongly when he deserves it. We just don’t go barking up kooky fruit trees along with disgruntled Sarah Palin fans.

Your “facts” aren’t an accurate depiction of the real developments in this conspiracy theory story.

So much for a check mate. Game was over before it started. Next case please.

08-570
BERG, PHILIP J. V. OBAMA, BARACK, ET AL.
The motion of Bill Anderson for leave to file a brief asamicus curiae is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is denied.

‘Natural Born’ is actually not defined in constitution (appears once) and it was left up to future congresses and courts to work out citizenship. The result is two categories Natural and Naturalized. Obama was born in HI (despite the poorly researched claims to the contrary) and is therefore a Natural(Jus Soli).

“It is more difficult than I think a lot of people realize,” the President-elect explained. “Part of the challenge that you have is that you have a bunch of folks that have been detained, many of whom who may be very dangerous who have not been put on trial or have not gone through some adjudication. And some of the evidence against them may be tainted even though it’s true. And so how to balance creating a process that adheres to rule of law, habeas corpus, basic principles of Anglo American legal system, by doing it in a way that doesn’t result in releasing people who are intent on blowing us up.”

Well as I have said all along Obama either natural or not natural born will not have to pay a penalty.
The United States Supreme Court Judges will do absolutely nothing as they have done all along. They know full well if they do determine that Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen that he will have to relinquish the position. If they find in favor of the few “nut cases as called by the Dems” then we can expect a riot of black population.
You will say that is impossible but I ask you to think back to the cops who were aquitted in the Rodney King case in LA that required the National Guard to be called in, this would require martial law not just in one state but all the states. You say that blacks can not be that ignorant again I ask you to think about 6 black youths in Jenna Louisiana beating a white kid and the black kids go to jail, several of the black kids had wrap sheets a mile long but thousands of blacks decended on that little sleepy southern town.

When the security or safety of the citizens are an issue certain laws in the constitution will be ignored.

Obama will be president and the Supreme Court will not stand in the way on the 20th Roberts will do his side show act and Obama will be 44.

The Justices of the Supreme Court could have just subpoened the vault copy and said we have seen it and its a legal document but all those so called protectors of the US constitution have betrayed the United States and should be impeached.

Jim,
I don’t have a personal opinion one way or the other on this issue. But it does kind of pass the Occam’s razor test. The simplest reason to explain why BHO won’t trot that puppy out is because it isn’t real.

Here’s another “simplest” reason: these people piss him off and he doesn’t want to give them the time of day. Another “simplest” reason: he’s already had Hawaii state government officials — including the Republican Governor — look into it and certify publicly that he was born in Hawaii. “Simplest” doesn’t really just mean “sounds good to me.” There is ample empirical reason to believe he was born in Hawaii, and there is no evidence that he was not.

These people are not about Occam’s razor, anyway: they claim, variously, that he was born in Kenya (to be ever-imminently proven by emerging evidence that never actually emerges), but also that he was born in Hawaii but has secret British citizenship, and also that he is the secret love child of Malcolm X, who was oddly not a Kenyan. Like the 9-11 “truth” theorists, they’re fond of a conclusion and looking desperately for shreds of anything to enable them to reach that conclusion.

And therefore, you must not have a name! You won’t tell us what your real name is, after all, and Occam’s razor says that the simplest reason is true. The simplest reason that you won’t tell us your real name is that you don’t have one! OMG!

I really hope that you guys dont think this is over. Currrently there are still at least 9 cases regarding BO’s birth certificate and 2 regarding his college transcripts.
Keep in mind the only one that has been saying BO was born in Kenya was P.Berg.
The others simply want to know the facts and then lets the facts speak for themselves.
BO is hiding his full birth certificate. Why? no one knows for sure
BO is hiding his college transcripts. Mainly his admittance application is what people are after. Currently a legal court order was obtained to retrieve the transcripts and then the college called BO’s legal team and they have threatened to file suit against anyone that continues to attempt to obtain the info on BO.
What do I think? I think he is hiding something but dont know what it is. I hope they get all of the info that is being looked for then this can all be done.

You mean “then we can pick some other detail on which no evidence is available to indicate a problem, say ‘absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!’ and come up with some new theories.”

Let me make a suggestion: has Barack Obama submitted to a medical exam to prove that his belly button is genuine? It’s possible that his belly button is a fake because he is an artificially generated CLONE. Why is Barack Obama unwilling to submit to navel-verification analysis? What is he hiding? We just want to know the TRUTH!!!

What would have happened in the early days of the United States if President George Washington were succeeded along the presidential line by a hypothetical son of Major-General William Howe who commanded the British forces in the Battle of Bunker Hill and a hypothetical American citizen mother?

After the hundreds of thousands of lives lost in the American Revolution, do you think that the American Constitution would have considered the aforementioned hypothetical son of General Howe and his hypothetical American wife a Natural Born Citizen?

This is a good way to portray Barack Obama II’s citizenship being born to a British father and an American mother, regardless of whether he was born in Hawaii or Kenya.

Three requisites, all of which must concur, for Natural Born Citizenship eligible for President of the U.S.:

1. Father must be US Citizen (either Naturalized or Natural Born)

and

2. Mother must be US Citizen (either Naturalized or Natural Born)

and

3. Must be born in US soil

Note: In Statutory Construction, the meaning of the term has to be interpreted according to the usage of the day it was used. At the time when the U.S. Constitution was drafted, everybody knew what is meant by the term “Natural Born Citizen” and they didn’t have to define it in the Constitution itself because the latter is not a dictionary but a contract with the people. Such Contract is enforceable by any citizen bound by it, and therefore any citizen has full legal standing to question the eligibility of the candidate for the President of the U.S.

The Law of Nations has been international law, which as documented by Emmerich de Vatel (1758) states, in Chapter XIX, paragraph 212 (note the reference to plural citizens):

“The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.”

John A. Bingham (the chief framer of the related 14th Amendment of the Constitution): “Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”

What are the possible birth situations that give rise to a citizenship question?
Answer:

To properly analyze the citizenship of a person, we have created these situations for the courts to decide, ultimately the Supreme Court of the US (SCOTUS).

Situation 1:

The father is a Mexican citizen. The mother is a Mexican citizen. Months prior to birth, the parents illegally cross the border into the US. The child is subsequently born in US territories in 2009. Is this child a US citizen? Furthermore, is this child a Natural Born Citizen (NBC) eligible for President (POTUS)?

Situation 2:

The father is a naturalized U.S. citizen. The mother is a naturalized U.S. citizen. The child is born outside USA territories in 2009. Is this child a US citizen? Furthermore, is this child a Natural Born Citizen (NBC) eligible for President (POTUS)?

Situation 3:

The father is a naturalized U.S. citizen. The mother is a naturalized U.S. citizen. The child is born within USA territories in 2009. Is this child a US citizen? Furthermore, is this child a Natural Born Citizen (NBC) eligible for President (POTUS)?

Situation 4:

The father is an immigrant to the U.S. but is not yet a U.S. citizen. The mother is an immigrant to the U.S. but is not yet a U.S. citizen. The child is born within USA territories in 2009. Is this child a US citizen? Furthermore, is this child a Natural Born Citizen (NBC) eligible for President (POTUS)?

Situation 5:

The father is a British citizen. The mother is a US citizen. The child is born within USA territories in year 2009. Is this child a US citizen? Furthermore, is this child a Natural Born Citizen (NBC) eligible for President (POTUS)?

Situation 6:

The father is a British citizen. The mother is a US citizen. The child is born outside USA territories in year 2009. Is this child a US citizen? Furthermore, is this child a Natural Born Citizen (NBC) eligible for President (POTUS)?

Situation 7:

The father is a British citizen. The mother is a US Citizen mother who is not yet 19 years old. The child is born in Kenya in 1961. Is this child a US citizen? Furthermore, is this child a Natural Born Citizen (NBC) eligible for President (POTUS)? Note that the law in 1961 differs from the law in 2009.

Situation 8:

The father is a British citizen. The mother is a US Citizen mother who is not yet 19 years old. The child is born in Hawaii in 1961. Is this child a US citizen? Furthermore, is this child a Natural Born Citizen (NBC) eligible for President (POTUS)? Note that the law in 1961 differs from the law in 2009.

But the Hawaii Director of Health has confirmed that Obama’s original birth certificate is with them! So that’s the end of it!!!
Answer:

Think like a lawyer.

Focus on what the Health Director is saying, and also on what she is NOT saying.

Here’s the statement:

“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record,” DOH Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said.

Fukino said she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama’s original birth certificate.

“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures,” Fukino said.

Fukino said that no state official, including Gov. Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama’s certificate be handled differently from any other.

Having read the above, notice:

1. Fukino is NOT stating that the original birth certificate is a US birth certificate.

2. Fukino is NOT stating that is not a Kenyan birth certificate.

3. Fukino is only stating that a birth certificate (which could be Kenyan) is filed in accordance with the rules.

4. Fukino is NOT saying that Obama’s record is not filed according to Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178 that allows “registration” of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the child’s birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence.

5. Fukino’s statement, therefore, does not rule out that Obama could have a Kenyan birth certificate but still filed according to Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178 that allows “registration” of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the child’s birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence.

6. Fukino’s statement, also does not rule out registration of birth of a child born outside the US but registered in Hawaii.

That statement failed to resolve any of the questions being raised by litigation and press accounts.

OMG, HowardG, you’re right! Focus on what the Health Director is NOT saying!

The Health Director is NOT saying that she is not HowardG’s mother. Therefore, she must be your mother, HowardG!

The Health Director is NOT saying that she has no nuclear bombs hidden in her home. Therefore, she must have nuclear weapons hidden in her home.

The Health Director is also NOT saying that she has not denied that she ate pickled children’s brains for breakfast. So, that means that she… um… hold on a minute… that she has denied eating pickled children’s brains for breakfast. And why would she deny eating pickled children’s brains for breakfast, unless she has in fact eaten pickled children’s brains for breakfast?

Once you understand that the Health Director is an eater of pickled children’s brains every morning of the week, everything else falls into place.

Obama doesn’t have to present to every citizen in the US his own copy. He only needs to show it, in closed door proceedings, to a competent court or authority who can legally confirm that he has legally complied with the legally required Natural Born Citizenship. His privacy will not be violated.

There is a conflict between the right to privacy and the proof of natural born citizenship.

Surely, the candidate has the burden to prove he is qualified, the people cannot just rely on his word, or on his scanned copy of a computer-generated SHORT FORM.

On the contrary, the LONG FORM is very relevant. It is the legally accepted conclusive proof of birth according to the Rules of Evidence.

The right of privacy of the individual (with respect to his proof of citizenship) is ipso facto waived in favor of proving that he is constitutionally qualified for run for the Presidency which requires him to be a natural born citizen.

When a candidate runs for public office he files an application for candidacy, and this is a public instrument for review by the public.

When the office requires a specific requirement which in this case is “natural born citizenship,” then the candidate must prove he is qualified.

It is to prevent people like the defenders of Obama (who insist on the short form) and Berg and Martin and Keyes (who insist on the LONG FORM) to have debates on which kind of FORM is necessary and sufficient.

It is meant to satisfy everyone, or even ONE SINGLE VOTER like Berg who as a citizen deserves to know with finality if their President has met constitutional qualifications.

The internet articles are irrelevant. Remedial law is now in the foreground. It is the best evidence rule.

Basic in remedial law: Mere tolerance of evidence (short form) does not elevate it to best evidence status precisely when the authenticity of the best evidence (LONG FORM) is being questioned.

So far, the US govt agencies have tolerated the short form for Barack but actually insisted on the LONG Form from other candidates in previous elections (read about these cases) for different elective posts.

Why this fiasco is happening shows that even a country as advanced as the US has legal loopholes. In many schools without the LONG FORM you cannot even go to kindergarten.

It is axiomatic in law that there is always a best evidence and in there’s a secondary evidence and the training in law is for the student to identify which of the two are admissible. The best evidence are listed in the Rules of Evidence.

If a short form has been “tolerated” that is not the same as the “best evidence”. It is still secondary evidence.

Just because it has been tolerated doesnt mean it cannot be assailed. The remedial procedure then is to go beyond the “tolerated” and to go the “real proof” which is the LONG FORM.

If you read in the internet several old cases of disputes being resolved by the long form (not by the short form) you would realize that there are many US cases where age qualifications etc have been proved only by LONG FORM.

Obama has not satisfied the minimum requirement which is natural born citizenship. And precisely since a question is raised he must answer it.

Why are there lawyers who insist that the SHORT FORM is enough? That’s because they are defending one side of the debate.

Of course, all lawyers know the best evidence rule, but if you are defending one side of the case,

– you bang the table like hell to prevent the opening of the REAL PROOF.

– And attack the person and

– question the motives of the complainant.

One must look at it as a judge, not as a campaigner.

Some judges are biased too. They question standing, they raise technicalities.

But somewhere out there is the solution: LONG FORM.

But even as a journalist or as a law student, you will NOT be content with secondary evidence precisely when the best evidence is being questioned.

Ask any of your friend lawyers, or judges, mere “tolerance” of the short form does not elevate it to the “best evidence.” status which is the real proof.

Thus, as of today, Obama has not met the minimum standard of proof which is the LONG FORM. all other forms do not have the weight of a LONG FORM.

It is basic remedial law.

This is not mere curiosity. It is proving that fact of natural born citizenship.

Obama doesn’t have to present to every citizen in the US his own copy. He only needs to show it, in closed door proceedings, to a competent court or authority who can legally confirm that he has legally complied with the legally required Natural Born Citizenship.

Oh, give me a fucking break. It is basic remedial law in the State of Hawaii that they release the short form, and basic remedial law in the State of Hawaii that all the forms Barack Obama has access to, Barack Obama has obtained and released, with official certification by the State of Hawaii itself that he was born there.

You can write twenty more paragraphs of absolute drivel, but it doesn’t change

It is a time of fear in the face of freedom, a time of an emptying country and swelling cities, a time for the widening of previous roads and the opening of new paths, yet a time when these paths are mined by knowing algorithms of the all-seeing eye. It is the time of the warrior's peace and the miser's charity, when the planting of a seed is an act of conscientious objection. These are the times when maps fade, old landmarks crumble and direction is lost. Forwards is backwards now, so we glance sideways at the strange lands through which we are all passing, knowing for certain only that our destination has disappeared. We are unready to meet these times, but we proceed nonetheless, adapting as we wander, reshaping the Earth with every tread. Behind us we have left the old times, the standard times, the high times. Welcome to the irregular times.